ArticleItalian journal of pediatrics2026
Off-label prescribing in pediatrics: between regulatory gaps and clinical evidence.
Article in Italian journal of pediatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite important regulatory progress, evidence supporting the use of medicines in children remains limited, and off-label prescribing continues to be common in pediatric practice. Regulatory initiatives such as the United States Pediatric Research Equity Act (PREA) and the European Pediatric Regulation were designed to increase the labelling information relevant to paediatric use, yet important gaps persist because studies are often delayed, incomplete, or absent for many conditions and formulations. This article addresses the common misconception that off-label prescribing is always inappropriate or unsupported and argues that this interpretation is not supported by the current evidence. In reality, many off-label treatments in pediatrics are supported by scientific evidence, clinical guidelines, and consolidated experience, even when formal regulatory approval is lacking. Examples involving pediatric oncology, child psychiatric disorders, and supportive care illustrate how effective therapies may remain off-label despite becoming standards of care. The Italian experience reflects these broader challenges. Studies have shown that off-label prescribing is structural rather than exceptional in pediatrics, while national initiatives such as Law 648/96 and pediatric formularies have sought to support evidence-based prescribing beyond regulatory boundaries. It is necessary to overcome the simplistic distinction between prescriptions that comply with the indications and appropriate prescriptions. A more rational framework should distinguish unsupported off-label use from evidence-based off-label prescribing. Reducing the pediatric evidence gap therefore requires not only more pediatric research, but also recognition of rational off-label prescribing as an essential component of pediatric clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.